New political parties must wipe slate clean

New political parties must wipe slate clean

Outdoors lover and CEO businessman Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit is entering politics with a party billed as the new generation. (FB/thanathorn.juangroongruangkit)
Outdoors lover and CEO businessman Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit is entering politics with a party billed as the new generation. (FB/thanathorn.juangroongruangkit)

As new political parties rush to reserve names and kick off the registration process, there emerges an impression that our politics is being returned to a democratic mode. The existing political parties are supposed to start confirming the memberships of their members next month. However, there still is no clear signal from the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) over when it will allow political parties -- new or old -- to conduct activities. The road ahead remains full of pitfalls and loopholes. It will be a long time before the dust settles, if ever.

The challenges for Thai democracy are not about setting up political parties or having general elections. In fact, there are barriers that need to be cleared before Thailand can achieve democratic rule with liberty and freedom.

The first barrier is the positions of the political parties themselves.

Suranand Vejjajiva was secretary-general to the prime minister during the Yingluck Shinawatra government and is now a political analyst.

In principle, a political party is a coalition of similar interest groups with like-minded ideologies and approaches to implementing policies. It will try to gain enough votes in order to be able to make significant changes, with a broad support base and common concerns through a democratic process within the party. To achieve that, the party must cope with polarised ideas and create an opportunity for active participation from its members to ensure that its interests will not be concentrated with those of a privileged few.

Sadly, few political parties, past or present, have this modus operandi. In modern Thai political history, Thaksin Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai Party was able to muster such a coalition and proposed a progressive platform that enabled the party to win landslide elections in 2001 and 2005.

Other parties rely on personalities, with some familiar faces at the national level and a local and regional patronage support base. Elections are basically a numbers game -- collecting as many as possible influential local families -- who in turn deliver votes in exchange for favours, business or personal, in the near future, e.g. projects funded out of the annual national budget have largely been dominated by those with connections. The contractors have been linked to elected politicians, mostly with guaranteed kickbacks.

At the national level, a systematic and transparent drive to raise funds for political parties is lacking. They end up being financed by a few patrons and large businesses who channel funds through connections for a few viable political parties.

Checking out the present political landscape, the underlying assumption for old and new parties remain the same. Of the existing ones, the Pheu Thai Party, which enjoys the broadest support, now relies on the decisions of its patron, Thaksin, while the Democrat Party is a collection of former members of parliament linked to local and regional patrons down South and in Bangkok.

The smaller ones are even more local in nature, with notable family patrons -- Bhumjaithai in southern Isan (the Chidchob family), Chartthaipattana in the Central Region (Silpa-archa family), and Palang Chon in Chon Buri (Khunploem family), etc.

Some may want to give the benefit of the doubt to the new parties which are still in the process of registration. But an initial look is quite disappointing. Many are extensions of the old parties or simply old wine in new bottles. Some are locking in names to prevent competitors, and a few are reserves set up in case the main parties fail or face a ban. Many will try to sell the party name for a profit while others expect funding from the Election Commission, although their activities are dubious in nature.

Under the spotlight now is Thanatorn Juangroongruangkit and Piyabutr Saengkanokul's party, now branded by the media (and themselves) as the party of the new generation. They have yet to reveal the party's name and a set of comprehensive ideas, except those that were mentioned in respective interviews to the media. But the combination of a successful businessman with a political conscience and an academic with strong democratic values could become an advantage in the political game.

The second barrier is even tougher to break through. It has shrouded our political landscape since the 1932 revolution. The conservative elites have never trusted democracy. The forced share of power by Khana Rassadorn in the upheaval that introduced democracy was resented by the elites, then and now. Their main tool to control the governing structure is the bureaucracy -- civilian, police and military.

The Thai bureaucracy has never been uprooted like those of neighbouring countries since we were not colonised. Thai technocrats, unlike those in Japan who adjusted through major reforms after World War II, continued untouched and dominated the direction of the nation throughout the decades. Politicians, elected or authoritarian, come and go but a technocratic regime remained.

The brief experiment with a full-fledged democracy under the 1997 Constitution again proved the elites have the patience for the chaos that comes with free speech and representative government. But more importantly, they became threatened as power slipped towards the popular Thaksin.

With his own wealth and modern techniques in building a mass-oriented political party, Thaksin did not have to rely on support from the technocratic regime. Instead the technocrats came to realise they had to rely on their political masters for career advancements and financial interests.

The traditional base of power had shifted, and that could not be tolerated by the elites.

Granted, elected politicians have abused their power in many ways, but it has been proven again and again that such abuses occur in every government, including the present administration. In an authoritarian regime, it is even worse in the absence of the checks and balances of a parliament. And since the regime dominated the independent agencies, they have shifted to cater to the regime and lost their neutrality.

The regime is attempting to control the national agenda by introducing its 20-year strategic plan, which is essentially an extension of the five-year National Economic and Social Development Plan that has set the agenda and tone for the technocratic regime for the past 50 years. The platforms of all political parties must comply with the plan.

How to break down these barriers? Political parties with the usual approach towards elections, aiming only at gaining seats in parliament and asking for power sharing with the elites are not enough. Even a political party with a progressive agenda will not suffice. Thailand needs a political movement which proposes structural changes within a democratic context, of which none exist, yet.

Suranand Vejjajiva

Former secretary-general to the prime minister

Suranand Vejjajiva was secretary-general to the prime minister during the Yingluck Shinawatra government and is now a political analyst.

Email : info@bangkokvoice.com

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (14)